Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Former NSA lawyer: the cyberwar is between tech firms and the US government

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 79 posts

Re: Former NSA lawyer: the cyberwar is between tech firms and the US government

#31

Post by declan »

I've known Stewart Baker, the ex-NSA GC quoted in the linked article, for about 15 years--not incredibly well, but well enough that he'd show up at parties I held in my home when I was living in D.C. before moving to the SF bay area.

Stewart is extremely smart, should not be underestimated, and HN comments in this thread calling him "incompetent" reflect badly on the person making the comment. He's likely the single most capable adversary the HN/EFF/ACLU/Cato/Mozilla/etc. axis faces over encryption (if he ends up playing that role).

Stewart is correct that end-to-end crypto will "restrict [companies'] ability to sell" products internationally. And he is narrowly correct that "the market for absolute encryption is more limited than you might think" in a corporate environment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ak4ZwLU3aX0 [8:45]

But these are merely clever rhetorical devices. Of course Apple/Google/FB/etc. know that HTTPS will vex snoophappy governments; at this point I suspect their CEOs may view that as a welcome side effect and in any case know their business better than a DC attorney does. And of course banks and brokerage firms don't want end-to-end encryption for their employees; they have likely have FINRA and other legal obligations to preserve correspondence.

Okay, Russia and China are snoophappy and banks may want access to employees' email. Now can we go back to talking about the NSA's bulk surveillance of law-abiding Americans?

Stewart's comments at 12:56 about Silicon Valley companies "picking fights" with the NSA are also misleading. In reality, the NSA was "picking fights" by bulk-tapping Google's interdata center links, subverting encryption standards, and (in the 1990s) defending export controls that weakened American companies' ability to compete. I posted more about this here: https://twitter.com/declanm/status/529804398457651201 https://twitter.com/declanm/status/529798596221095937

Today these companies -- and hopefully the startup founders here on HN -- are merely protecting their users by adopting encryption. At http://recent.io/, which I founded after leaving CNET/CBS earlier this year, our forthcoming Android and iOS apps use only HTTPS to connect to the backend. Naturally.

TLDR: You underestimate Stewart Baker at your peril.

Re: Former NSA lawyer: the cyberwar is between tech firms and the US government

#32

Post by ihsw »

declan wrote: post #31

I've known Stewart Baker, the ex-NSA GC quoted in the linked article, for about 15 years--not incredibly well, but well enough that he'd show up at parties I held in my home when I was living in D.C. before moving to the SF bay area. Stewart is extremely smart, should not be underestimated, and HN comments in this thread calling him "incompetent" reflect badly on the person making the comment. He's likely the single…

How do you feel about the assertion that the NSA et al were getting something for free, and all this hubbub about privacy and encryption is simply a smokescreen -- the Google's of the world want their pound of flesh.

They see a new and robust revenue stream where the product was being shoplifted, and they're correcting that business oversight. They will give the government what they want, but at a cost.

Be it in a dollar amount, backroom hand-greasing, political football, or other otherwise -- the government will pay that cost.

Re: Former NSA lawyer: the cyberwar is between tech firms and the US government

#33

Post by billions »

The internet moves much faster than government and so the government can't control it. Information moves like water. Everybody is exposed for who they are and nobody can fake it. The whole world is in a big room and everybody can hear each other. Wars will no longer be violent and fought with weapons, they will be fought with software hacks.

Re: Former NSA lawyer: the cyberwar is between tech firms and the US government

#34

Post by malandrew »

csandreasen wrote: post #27
Spooky23 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is touching that a NSA lawyer cares so deeply about Apple and Google's business model. BlackBerry fucked up their business the old fashioned way -- by screwing up. They were an early player that listened too closely to their early adopter customers. These customers, including the banks and federal government, cared about stuff like keyboards and CAC integration. I've worked in very large IT environments, and users…

What Baker is trying to express is that companies like Apple could be shooting themselves in the foot with corporate sales if the data sitting on devices they're manufacturing can't be handed over when counsel tells you that there's a valid warrant. If Apple says the data on the phones is completely secure and not even the cops can get to it, then that means IT can't get to it when directed to, either. Management mig…

Apple and Google are merely absolving themselves of being involved in the legal matters of others.

The third-party doctrine basically forces third-parties to be legally culpable for discovery. Google and Apple don't want to be legally responsible anymore, so they've pushed the responsibility for complying with counsel to the end-user.

i.e. instead of law enforcement going to Google and Apple and saying "I have a legal right to search X. Hand it over.", law enforcement now needs to go up to the person whose papers and effects are being searched and ask the same thing.

Had the founding fathers been aware that the notion that one day third parties would become responsible for the papers and effects for millions of citizens, it's reasonable to assume the warrants would have had to be issued in a way where the subject of the warrant would at least have a right to know they were the subject of a warrant. With third-party doctrine, the government got the benefit of issuing warrants to entities unlikely to protest because protecting the rights of others incurs a cost.

Third-party doctrine has been a civil liberties disaster because it decoupled the recipient of the warrant from the subject of the warrant. That decoupling has lead to a scenario that deprives millions of people the right to contest a warrant in court because they might not even know such a warrant was ever issued.

It's not like Google and Apple are taking away the government's ability to issue warrants. They are just removing themselves as a third-party. The government now needs to go directly to the person who possesses the phone and issue a warrant to that person.

Re: Former NSA lawyer: the cyberwar is between tech firms and the US government

#35

Post by logicalman »

csandreasen wrote: post #26
Zigurd wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would these use cases need end to end encryption?

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. I wasn't meaning to limit my argument to data in transit - I was also including data at rest. To answer your question though, end-to-end encryption of data in transit will obviously interfere with an employer's ability to log transactions. I think Mr. Baker's arguments were more directed at the recent ubiquitous iPhone encryption controversy (in fact, after doing a quick search, he made a…

Apple could just sell backdoored phones in China and encrypted phones in America.

Re: Former NSA lawyer: the cyberwar is between tech firms and the US government

#36

Post by guelo »

declan wrote: post #31

I've known Stewart Baker, the ex-NSA GC quoted in the linked article, for about 15 years--not incredibly well, but well enough that he'd show up at parties I held in my home when I was living in D.C. before moving to the SF bay area. Stewart is extremely smart, should not be underestimated, and HN comments in this thread calling him "incompetent" reflect badly on the person making the comment. He's likely the single…

Why does going to your parties make someone not incompetent? In any case his competence is moot, the man is a demagogue and as such should be avoided and ignored.

Re: Former NSA lawyer: the cyberwar is between tech firms and the US government

#37

Post by zaroth »

It's surreal reading what Baker is saying. Companies aren't generally afraid of their employees, and any competent IT department can manage BYOD. The reality is that privacy and security has become an extremely important differentiator, and I'm glad to see Apple and Google both capitalizing on it.

This was by far the scariest part;

  "But I’ve worked with these companies and as soon as they get
  a law enforcement request no matter how liberal or
  enlightened they think they are, sooner to later they find
  some crime that is so loathsome they will do anything to
  find that person and identify them so they can be punished."
Seriously? Yes, just advertise your complete contempt for following due process, because, you know, it's easier to catch crooks that way. Thank you for proving within the article exactly why end-to-end cryptography is needed, so that we don't have to trust people like this to actually follow the law.

Re: Former NSA lawyer: the cyberwar is between tech firms and the US government

#38

Post by AnthonyMouse »

declan wrote: post #31

I've known Stewart Baker, the ex-NSA GC quoted in the linked article, for about 15 years--not incredibly well, but well enough that he'd show up at parties I held in my home when I was living in D.C. before moving to the SF bay area. Stewart is extremely smart, should not be underestimated, and HN comments in this thread calling him "incompetent" reflect badly on the person making the comment. He's likely the single…

> Stewart is extremely smart, should not be underestimated, and HN comments in this thread calling him "incompetent" reflect badly on the person making the comment.

Incompetent may be the wrong word. What people (including you) are getting at is that his arguments are unpersuasive upon examination. It's all just fear mongering.

There are two plausible explanations for this. The first is that he doesn't see the holes in his own arguments; that would substantiate the charge of incompetence. The second is that he does but makes the arguments anyway in order to mislead others who don't. That appears to be the case you're making. But I'm not sure scoundrel is a lesser charge than idiot.

Re: Former NSA lawyer: the cyberwar is between tech firms and the US government

#39

Post by declan »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #38
declan wrote: post #31

I've known Stewart Baker, the ex-NSA GC quoted in the linked article, for about 15 years--not incredibly well, but well enough that he'd show up at parties I held in my home when I was living in D.C. before moving to the SF bay area. Stewart is extremely smart, should not be underestimated, and HN comments in this thread calling him "incompetent" reflect badly on the person making the comment. He's likely the single…

> Stewart is extremely smart, should not be underestimated, and HN comments in this thread calling him "incompetent" reflect badly on the person making the comment. Incompetent may be the wrong word. What people (including you) are getting at is that his arguments are unpersuasive upon examination. It's all just fear mongering. There are two plausible explanations for this. The first is that he doesn't see the holes…

Welcome to the delightful world of Washington, D.C. realpolitik!

A third possibility is that he honestly believes his position is the correct one--or is holding out the possibility of returning to a .gov/.mil job in this or a future administration--and (a) is using the best arguments for his case, however weak or (b) is on a conference panel, not in a courtroom, and is aiming for entertaining one-liners rather than a point-by-point argument that you'd find in a legal brief or congressional testimony.

Re: Former NSA lawyer: the cyberwar is between tech firms and the US government

#40

Post by declan »

guelo wrote: post #36
declan wrote: post #31

I've known Stewart Baker, the ex-NSA GC quoted in the linked article, for about 15 years--not incredibly well, but well enough that he'd show up at parties I held in my home when I was living in D.C. before moving to the SF bay area. Stewart is extremely smart, should not be underestimated, and HN comments in this thread calling him "incompetent" reflect badly on the person making the comment. He's likely the single…

Why does going to your parties make someone not incompetent? In any case his competence is moot, the man is a demagogue and as such should be avoided and ignored.

Read his book: http://www.skatingonstilts.com/
Post reply on HN